People who sees this problem just as a legal subject or as a censorship law can only solve it for short term.
The best way to understand this issue is through knowing the internet history of Turkey. Perception and appreciation of internet as a media has started with the foundation of haberturk.com. Haberturk used scandal news and events in order to call attentions as a news website. The need of controlling and inspecting the internet by hands of state begins when this site starts to becoming a thread to the governing party of the time. A draft of law has been constituted. However since this act of law aims to control websites such as haberturk.com, it becomes censoring more than inspecting. Moreover, since legists who prepared it knows the traditional media more than the digital one, the law contains technically impossible procedures such as two photocopies of each webpage sent to local authorities etc. Liberals who realized this reacted hard to the law. This caused the moderate renewal of the law.
But, despite all the softening, this new law signed by the President of the time, Ahmet Necdet SEZER in 2005 contains censoring of media in its soul, so its logic of punishment was deep wide in order to increase its dissuasiveness. The law took the force of processing this logic from taboos of Turkish society such as child pornography, insult to Ataturk etc. That is because the legislation was enacted by agreement of all forces from media to public. These forces of which the law received its support was its Achilles heel at the same time. May be by this analysis, or just by coincidence, immediately after the law was laid down, a video broadcasted in Youtube was sued for one of the nine main components of the so known catalog crimes in Turkish lawbook. Eventually the case lead to a ban to Youtube due to those nine crimes mentioned.
This situation caused the forces in Turkey who supported this law once splitted into two. The main reason to this separation was not arised of the problem thereopen but the worries. Yet for the moment Youtube.com should show respect to the subject which is very sensitive in common for Turkish people and remove the video. However, liberal constitution interests in concerns more than the problem itself, it cares for Turkey not to remain in hands of censorship, and uncomfortable with the incapability of government handling the issue. For the moment, major aim of all groups who want youtube.com not to be banned is not more than the will of diverging from a censorious society. Besides, all forces of Turkish community owns an indisputable integrity about the removal of those visuals containing insults and disrespect to Ataturk, and demands esteem on our culture and merits.Turkish culture, though it molded its matriahal basics through tolerance, is committed deeply to their values which are protected from past to present and endowed with high pride and figure to serve them even if it worth their lives. Although this approach of Turks is seem paradoxical in many other cultures including European culture,it is the main speciality that makes Turkish people distinct in the world.
To this reason, no matter how it is told, in order to remove this problem, primarily youtube.com has to show respect to Turkey’s culture and values. People who sees this problem just as a legal subject or as a censorship law can only solve it for short term. Youtube, like many other international firms operating in Turkey, has to be respectful not only to our laws but also to our viewpoints. In this matter, Google groups should take companies operating for long time in Turkey such as Microsoft as an example. Yet, though similar problems are lived with facebook, the solution come easily alongwith the communication skills of Microsoft.